In a Jan. 31 letter, John Anderson asserts that my wife’s “thoughts” about bad things happening to the “petty criminals” rises to a level where she should be put in a violent offender’s program. There is nothing petty about committing multiple armed robberies and terrorizing cashiers. Pam made no threats as Anderson asserts but expressed that this kind of violent crime should be a capital offense. The perpetrator knew it was wrong, making a conscious decision to commit violence anyway. He should forfeit any further consideration.

Anderson shifts blame for the robbery to us, stating that we should not have “that kind of cash” in the drawer. In fact, the robber did not get enough cash to exceed our insurance deductible. Anderson implies the insurance company paying makes the crime less atrocious. The violation is not about cash. Our concern is for the trauma to our cashiers. Enhanced security will cost about $8,000 every year to have a second person at the checkout, because having two other employees in the store is not enough to deter the robbers. Now our cashiers must move in pairs.

Mr. Anderson, what if someone invaded your home, forced a member of your household to turn over valuables, and made them lie on the floor, wondering if they were going to get shot? If the robber only got $50 worth of stuff, would that be a petty offense? And of course, you would not have any thoughts about dire punishment for the criminals.

My wife expressing that there should be consequences, including the death penalty, for completely amoral behavior, is a perfectly valid response to this crime. Anderson should try compassion for the crime victims instead of publicly criticizing the anger expressed by those victims at the violation.